This is the most recent presentation of current resaerch on channel disturbance in Ozark Rivers.

1. Analysis and Classification of Channel Disturbance Zones in an Ozark River Derek Martin – Research Specialist Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute (OEWRI) Missouri State University Springfield, Missouri

2. Channel “Disturbance” “An area where excessive erosion or deposition has taken place, often resulting in extreme changes in channel pattern.” -Robert Jacobson (USGS)

3. Importance of identifying and understanding channel disturbance Biological Physical Engineering = Predictive capabilities Channel “Disturbance”

4. Characteristics of Ozarks River Channels Bedrock bed control High width/depth ratios Induces lateral channel movement where allowed Lateral controls Valley width Bluffs Riparian Veg? Sediment Inputs Cherty gravel Landuse induced? Combine to form unique channel patterns in the Ozarks…….

5. Channel Pattern Classification Jacobson, 1995

6. Channel Pattern Classification Channel Pattern Classification History Leopold & Wolman, 1957 Brice, 1975 Schumm, 1981 Nanson and Hickin, 1983 Rosgen, 1996 Rotation Translation Lobing and Compound Growth Extension

7. Disturbance Area Analysis – Finley River

9. History of agricultural land management

10. Contains one of the fastest growing counties in Missouri

12. What dictates disturbance area formation?

13. Characterize relevant channel change disturbance types

14. Interpret changes within the context of local physiography (Ozarks, Karst)Disturbance Area Analysis – Finley River

16. Sinkholes

17. Springs

19. Land use

20. 60% Grassland

21. 27% Forest

23. Methods Aerial photograph acquisition Rectification Accuracy Assessment

24. Methods 3. Data Analysis Dist Zone Determination 1. Photograph Analysis Dist Zone Classificaton Photo Acquisition Watershed Variables Photo Rectification Sinuostiy Migration Rates Error Analysis Drainage Area Active Channel Width 2. Data Extraction/Compilation Confinement Ratio Channel Centerlines Valley Width For Photo Error Buffer For Riparian Landcover Buffer Gravel Bars Riparian Landcover Soils DEM Watershed Delineation Slope Derivation

25. Methods Disturbance Area Identification

26. Methods Riparian Vegetation Extraction

27. Methods 10m DEM Stream Network Slope Sub-watershed Delineation Stream Profile Confining Valley Features

28. Methods 3. Data Analysis Dist Zone Determination 1. Photograph Analysis Dist Zone Classificaton Photo Acquisition Watershed Variables Photo Rectification Sinuostiy Migration Rates Error Analysis Drainage Area Active Channel Width 2. Data Extraction/Compilation Confinement Ratio Channel Centerlines Valley Width For Photo Error Buffer For Riparian Landcover Buffer Gravel Bars Riparian Landcover Soils DEM Watershed Delineation Slope Derivation

29. Data analyzed in three sections of watershed Results

30. Results 21% of main stem classified as disturbance

32. No differencein valley widths at dist. areas vs. stable areas

36. Translation

37. Chute Cutoff

38. Megabar

39. Extension

40. Translation

41. Chute Cutoff

42. Extension

43. Translation

44. Chute Cutoff

45. Megabar

46. Extension

47. Translation

48. Chute Cutoff

49. Megabar

50. Extension

51. Translation

52. Chute Cutoff

54. Results - Sinuosity

55. Results – Drainage Area

56. Results - Degree of Disturbance Extensions – cross-valley migration rate (m/yr) Translation – down-valley migration rate (m/yr) Chute Cutoff – stream segment length reduction (m) Megabar – bar width (m)

57. Results - Degree of Disturbance Extensions Mean migration rate = 1.01 m/yr Median migration rate = .97 m/yr Translations Mean migration rate = 2.65 m/yr Median migration rate = 2.23 m/yr

58. Results - Degree of Disturbance Chute Cutoff Mean length = 75.3 m Median length = 43.0 m Megabar Mean bar width = 49.5 m Median bar width = 41.0 m

59. Results - Meander Migration Rates Hooke (1980) obtained a regression equation between migration rate of meander loops and upstream drainage area No such relationship was discovered for Finley Creek…..almost the opposite.

60. Conclusions Disturbance areas form in areas of high confinement ratios compared to stable areas Riparian vegetation plays no role in disturbance area formation Four distinct disturbance area patterns can be identified on the Finley River Extension Translation Chute Cut-off Megabar formation Contributing drainage area plays no role in development of specific disturbance types Meander migration in the Finley River does not follow typical migration trends Disturbance types increase or decrease in intensity to maintain a sinuous equilibrium

61. Final Remarks Make accurate predictions of future river behavior “…a need for predictive capability with respect to river planform change.” (Gilvear et al., 2000) “A knowledge of rates and patterns of planform change is also important in understanding habitat diversity in floodplain environments” (Gilvear et al., 2000) Application of GIS in hydrology and watershed science

62. Thank You! Questions? Contact: Derek J. Martin, Research Specialist Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute Missouri State University Email: djmartin@missouristate.edu